Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol or etomidate

In combination with fentanyl, propofol was compared with etomidate for total intravenous anaesthesia in 21 women (ASA Grades I-II) admitted for elective hysterectomy. They received either propofol (bolus 1.5 mg kg-1, infusion 9 mg kg-1 h-1 for 10 min thereafter 6 mg kg-1 h-1) or etomidate (bolus 0.10 mg kg-1, infusion 3 mg kg-1 h-1 reduced to 0.6 mg kg-1 h-1). Fentanyl 10 micrograms kg-1 was given for induction followed by an infusion of 30 micrograms kg-1 h-1 for 10 min reduced to 6 micrograms kg-1 h-1 for the first hour and successively reduced over time. Induction was smooth and maintenance easy to manage in both groups. There was no difference in time from end of infusion until extubation, but the time until the patients could report their date of birth was significantly shorter in the propofol group. Nausea and vomiting were more pronounced in the etomidate group, and mental side-effects were only seen after etomidate. After 3 months, more patients in the etomidate group complained of reduced power of concentration. We conclude that total intravenous anaesthesia with either propofol or etomidate is equally easy to manage, but in the recovery situation propofol was advantageous in time and quality.     

Intraocular pressure changes during laparoscopy in patients anesthetized with propofol total intravenous anesthesia versus isoflurane inhaled anesthesia

We examined intraocular pressure (IOP) changes during gynecologic laparoscopy performed under either thiopental-isoflurane anesthesia or total IV propofol anesthesia. Forty adult women with no preexisting eye disease scheduled for gynecologic CO(2) insufflation laparoscopy were included in the study. Heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, peak and plateau airway pressure, ETCO(2), and IOP (using a Schioetz tonometer) were measured at defined intervals during the procedure. IOP decreased significantly after the induction of anesthesia in both groups, and remained so throughout the procedure in the propofol group. In the isoflurane group, however, IOP was increased significantly above the preinduction level after pneumoperitoneum with head-down position. There was no correlation between IOP and blood pressure or airway pressure. In conclusion, propofol total IV anesthesia may be a better choice for laparoscopic surgery should control of IOP be a concern. IMPLICATIONS: In this study, we examined the effect of two anesthetic techniques on the intraocular pressure changes during laparoscopic surgery in healthy subjects. Propofol IV anesthesia protected against increases in intraocular pressure with pneumoperitoneum and head-down position.     

Comparison of hypotensive epidural anaesthesia and spinal anaesthesia on blood loss and coagulation during and after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Hypotensive epidural anaesthesia (HEA) is a technique for reducing peroperative blood loss by significantly lowering mean arterial pressure (MAP). METHODS: Thirty patients scheduled for primary total hip arthroplasty were given HEA (n=15) or spinal anaesthesia (SPA) (n= 15) with bupivacaine in random order. The dose of bupivacaine was titrated to provide epidural blockade up to T1-T4 and spinal blockade at least to T10. Intravenous adrenaline infusion was adjusted to achieve a MAP of about 50-60 mmHg in the HEA group. During SPA MAP was maintained above 70 mmHg with ephedrine, as needed. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss (median and 25th and 75th percentiles) was 400 ml (163-575) in the HEA group and 900 ml (663-1,100) in the SPA group (P<0.05). At 3 h postoperatively cumulative blood loss was still smaller in the HEA group (600 ml versus 1,100 ml, P<0.05). The cumulative number of transfused packed red cell concentrate (PRC) units was smaller in the HEA group than in the SPA group during surgery and postoperatively. Prothrombin time value was smaller in the SPA than in the HEA group (69% versus 79%, P<0.05) at 3 h postoperatively. D-dimer concentrations increased more in the SPA group at the end of the surgery and 3 h postoperatively (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HEA resulted in reduced blood loss due to hypotension and reduced number of transfused PRC units during total hip arthroplasty. Based on lower prothrombin time value and higher D-dimer concentrations in the SPA group, the coagulation system might be better preserved during HEA than SPA.     

The cardiovascular changes associated with equipotent anaesthesia with either propofol or isoflurane

The differences in effects of anaesthetic agents on right ventricular function have not been studied. We have developed a cross–over study design to compare the effects of propofol and isoflurane on cardiac and specifically right ventricular function. Ten patients were anaesthetised with equivalent MAC of isoflurane to MIR of propofol. After measurements had been taken on the randomly assigned first agent the patients were crossed over to the other agent and measurements were repeated. Cardiac function was assessed using a pulmonary artery catheter with a fast response thermistor. There were no differences in heart rate or blood pressure between the two agents suggesting that equivalent anaesthetic doses had been given. There were significantly ( P < 0.05) higher cardiac output (4.0 to 4.5 1 min^-1), right ventricular ejection fraction (35.1 to 39.4%), stroke volume (35.4 to 39.6 ml) and right ventricular end–diastolic volume index (102 to 110 ml m^2–1) with propofol compared to isoflurane. We conclude that propofol results in improved right ventricular performance compared to isoflurane. We have also shown that anaesthetic agents can be compared using a cross–over study design, and have demonstrated that MAC of isoflurane and MIR of propofol can be directly compared. We suggest that propofol may be a more suitable agent than isoflurane for anaesthesia in patients who may already have impaired right ventricular function and in whom maintaining high cardiac output may be beneficial.     

Cerebrospinal fluid and blood propofol concentration during total intravenous anaesthesia for neurosurgery

Background. The aim of this paper is to compare the propofolconcentration in blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in patientsscheduled for different neurosurgical procedures and anaesthetizedusing propofol as part of a total intravenous anaesthesia technique. Methods. Thirty-nine patients (ASA I–III) scheduled forelective intracranial procedures, were studied. Propofol wasinfused initially at 12 mg kg^–1 h^–1 and thenreduced in steps to 9 and 6 mg kg^–1 h^–1. Duringanaesthesia, bolus doses of fentanyl and cis-atracurium wereadministered as necessary. After tracheal intubation the lungswere ventilated to achieve normocapnia with an oxygen-air mixture(FI_O2=0.33). Arterial blood and CSF samples for propofol examinationwere obtained simultaneously directly after intracranial drainageinsertion and measured using high-performance liquid chromatography.The patients were divided into two groups depending on the typeof neurosurgery. The Aneurysm group consisted of 13 patientswho were surgically treated for ruptured intracranial aneurysm.The Tumour group was composed of 26 patients who were undergoingelective posterior fossa extra-axial tumour removal. Results. Blood propofol concentrations in both groups did notdiffer significantly (P>0.05). The propofol concentrationin CSF was 86.62 (SD 37.99) ng ml^–1 in the Aneurysm groupand 50.81 (26.10) ng ml^–1 in the Tumour group (P<0.005). Conclusions. Intracranial pathology may influence CSF propofolconcentration. However, the observed discrepancies may alsoresult from quantitative differences in CSF composition andfrom restricted diffusion of the drug in the CSF. Br J Anaesth 2003; 90: 84–6     

Comparative analysis of costs of total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil vs. balanced anaesthesia with isoflurane and fentanyl

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the costs and benefits of total intravenous anaesthesia compared with a balanced anaesthesia regimen. METHODS: One-hundred and twenty-four patients undergoing cataract surgery were randomized to either a propofol/remifentanil or an isoflurane/fentanyl group. In the propofol/remifentanil group, both drugs were used for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia; in the isoflurane/fentanyl group, anaesthesia was induced with etomidate and fentanyl and maintained with isoflurane and fentanyl. All patients received mivacurium for muscle relaxation and the lungs were ventilated mechanically. The use of propofol and remifentanil resulted in a faster emergence and an overall savings per case of [symbol: see text] 12.25 due to a reduction in personnel costs which outweighs the higher drug acquisition costs. RESULTS: In the propofol and remifentanil group, more patients were satisfied and would accept the same anaesthetic again. CONCLUSION: We conclude that propofol and remifentanil is more cost-effective than isoflurane/fentanyl due to its better recovery profile, reduced total direct costs and higher patient satisfaction.     

Psychomotor recovery following propofol or isoflurane anaesthesia for day-care surgery

A newly developed test for the assessment of psychomotor recovery--the perceptive accuracy test (PAT)--is described. Seventy-four subjects who performed the test though that it was easy to perform and some were motivated to try it on a number of occasions. Eight persons performed the test on different days and at different periods of time; the results were consistent and reproducible. Eight more persons were then asked to do the test 4 times at 15-min intervals; no 'learning' was seen with this test. A randomized, prospective study was then performed in two groups of 15 patients, undergoing arthroscopic procedures of the knee. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with an infusion of propofol 12 mg/kg/h for the first 15 min, followed by 8 mg/kg/h subsequently in the propofol group. In the isoflurane group, anaesthesia was also induced with propofol, but isoflurane (0.5-2%) was used to maintain anaesthesia. Alfentanil was the analgesic used in both groups of patients. Results were compared with a third group of unanaesthetised controls, who were asked to perform psychomotor tests including choice reaction time and PAT at 30-min intervals for 2.5 h. There was a significant difference (P less than 0.01) in psychomotor recovery on the PAT-200 between the propofol group and control groups, but not in the isoflurane and control groups at 30 min. Both groups had returned to baseline values at 60 min in the PAT-60 and PAT-200. The choice reaction time showed no significant difference in either group 30 min after the anaesthetic.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Rocuronium potency and recovery characteristics during steady-state desflurane, sevoflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia

We have studied the potency and recovery characteristics of rocuronium during 1.25 MAC of isoflurane, desflurane, sevoflurane or propofol anaesthesia in 84 patients using electromyography. Potency was determined by a cumulative bolus technique. The mean ED50 of rocuronium was 169 (SD 41), 126 (32), 121 (28) and 136 (25) micrograms kg-1 during propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia, respectively (ns), and ED90 values were 358 (62), 288 (29), 289 (28) and 250 (28) micrograms kg-1, respectively. The reduction in ED90 was statistically significant for all three inhalation anaesthetics (P < 0.05) compared with propofol. After 120 min, the cumulative infusion rate of rocuronium to obtain twitch depression of 90-95% was 9.0 (1.9), 6.3 (1.6), 6.1 (2.0) and 6.1 (1.1) micrograms kg-1 min-1 during propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia, respectively (P < 0.01). Recovery index was 22 (13), 27 (10), 28 (13) and 26 (14) min under propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane anaesthesia, respectively (ns). There were no significant differences between the three potent inhalation anaesthetics in relation to potency, infusion requirements or recovery characteristics of rocuronium.      

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol or inhalational anaesthesia with isoflurane for major abdominal surgery: Recovery characteristics and postoperative oxygenation—an international multicentre study

Two hundred and ten adult patients undergoing open cholecystectomy, vagotomy or gastrectomy were included in a randomised multicentre study to compare postoperative nausea and vomiting, oxygen saturations for the first three postoperative nights, time to return of gastrointestinal function, mobilisation, and discharge from the hospital following induction and maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol and alfentanil or with thiopentone, nitrous oxide, isoflurane and alfentanil. Recovery from anaesthesia was significantly faster in the propofol group (mean (SD) times to eye opening and giving correct date of birth of 14.0 (SD 13.8) and 25.5 (SD 29.5) minutes, and 18.5 (SD 14.8) and 35.5 (SD 37.2) minutes in the propofol and isoflurane groups respectively). There was significantly less nausea in the propofol group (15.4%) than in the isoflurane group (33.7%) in the first two postoperative hours (p < 0.003) but not thereafter. There were no significant differences between the groups in any other recovery characteristics. The incidence of hypoxaemia (arterial oxygen saturation less than 93%) was close to 70% in both groups for the first three postoperative nights, indicating the need for oxygen therapy after major abdominal surgery.     

Comparison of minimum alveolar concentration between intravenous isoflurane lipid emulsion and inhaled isoflurane in dogs

BACKGROUND: As in inhaled isoflurane anesthesia, when isoflurane lipid emulsion (ILE; 8%, vol/vol) is intravenously administered, the primary elimination route is through the lungs. This study was designed to determine the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) and the time course of washout of isoflurane for intravenously infused ILE by monitoring end-tidal isoflurane concentration. METHODS: Twelve healthy adult mongrel dogs were assigned randomly to an intravenous anesthesia group with 8% ILE or to an inhalation anesthesia group with isoflurane vapor. An up-and-down method and stimulation of tail clamping were used to determine MAC of 8% ILE by intravenous injection in the intravenous anesthesia group and MAC by the inhaled approach in the inhalation anesthesia group, respectively. Isoflurane concentration and partial pressure in end-tidal gas, femoral arterial blood, and jugular venous blood were measured simultaneously just before each tail clamping and during washout. RESULTS: The induction time in the intravenous anesthesia group (105 +/- 24 s) was shorter than that in the inhalation anesthesia group (378 +/- 102 s; P < 0.01). MAC of 8% ILE by intravenous injection (1.12 +/- 0.18%) was significantly less than MAC by the inhaled approach (1.38 +/- 0.16%; P < 0.05). No significant difference was found between the two groups in the time course of washout of isoflurane. CONCLUSION: The MAC of intravenous anesthesia with 8% ILE was less than that of inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane vapor in dogs.     

Comparison of sufentanil/propofol versus isoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia on mesenteric artery blood flow

Duplex sonography was used to determine the changes in mesenteric arterial blood flow occurring in patients undergoing aortic surgery, anaesthetised either by total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and sufentanil (group A) or inhalational anaesthesia with isoflurane and nitrous oxide (group B). Sixteen patients were studied. Measurements were performed immediately before and 15 min after induction of anaesthesia, before surgery. There was a 38% decrease (p = 0.015) in the superior mesenteric artery end diastolic velocity in group A and a 23% decrease (p = 0.033) in the superior mesenteric artery peak systolic velocity in group B. There were no changes in any of the other sonography parameters in either group. We conclude that neither total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and sufentanil nor inhalational anaesthesia with isoflurane and nitrous oxide have any clinically significant influence on mesenteric blood flow in the absence of surgical stimulation.     

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and buprenorphine

A combination of propofol infusion and two bolus doses of buprenorphine, 2.5 or 5.0 micrograms/kg were evaluated in a total intravenous anaesthesia technique in 36 patients of ASA grade 1 or 2 undergoing cholecystectomy. Additional boluses of propofol were given intravenously if needed. Systolic blood pressure after tracheal intubation increased significantly only in those who received the smaller dose of buprenorphine. Patients in both groups remained haemodynamically stable throughout surgery with minimal side effects. Recovery was fast even with prolonged infusions and without major side effects. No patient reported awareness on postoperative questioning.     

Recovery after oral surgery with halothane, enflurane, isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia

We have compared the recovery characteristics of four differenttechniques for maintenance of anaesthesia in 99 day-case patientsadmitted for oral surgery. All patients received propofol forinduction of anaesthesia followed by halothane, enflurane, isofluraneor propofol infusion for maintenance of anaesthesia. Each patientwas subjected to a battery of psychometric tests which includedSpielberger state, trait, mood stress and mood arousal questionnaires,Maddox-Wing test and five-choice serial reaction time. All testswere performed before operation and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 24 and48 h after operation. Performance in the reaction time testdecreased significantly in the immediate postoperative period,returning almost to preoperative values by 4 h. However, onlythose patients who received enflurane or propofol had returnedto their performance level before surgery by 4 h, although allfour groups had achieved this target by 24 h. There was a furtherimprovement in performance at 48 h. Anxiety and stress werehigh before surgery and decreased rapidly in the postoperativeperiod. The Maddox-Wing test demonstrated a significant impairmentin performance in the first 1 h after surgery, which returnedto normal by discharge at 4 h. There were no significant differencesbetween the four groups in these latter tests. (Br. J. Anaesth.1994; 72: 559–566)     

Comparison of the effects of isoflurane and propofol on hepatic glutathione-S-transferase concentrations during and after prolonged anaesthesia

We have studied the effects of isoflurane or propofol anaesthesiaon hepatic giutathione-S-transferase (GST) concentrations in20 patients during and after prolonged plastic and reconstructivesurgery (approximately 10 h). Mean plasma concentrations ofGST did not exceed the normal range in any sample from any patient.Although GST concentrations in the propofol group were smallerthan those in the isoflurane group, these differences were notstatistically significant. These data show that prolonged propofolor isoflurane anaesthesia has no statistically significant effecton plasma concentrations of GS T during and after extended surgery.(B r. J. Anaesth. 1994; 72: 599–601) Presented in part to the Anaesthetic Research Society, OxfordMeeting, July 9–10, 1993 (British Journal of Anaesthesia1993; 71: 764P).     

Improved postoperative analgesia with isoflurane than with propofol anaesthesia

Purpose

The impact of hypnotic drugs on postoperative analgesia has not been evaluated. We compared the influence of the maintenance of anaesthesia with either propofol or isoflurane on postoperative pain.

Methods

Forty ASA 1 -2 women, undergoing cosmetic abdominoplasty were randomized to receive either 6–12 mg·kg^?1·hr^?1 propofol iv (P, n = 20) or MAC 1 -1.5 isoflurane inhalation (Iso, n = 20). The lungs were ventilated with N₂O 60% and O₂ 40%, and I μg·kg^?1 fentanyliv provided intraoperative analgesia. Before surgical closure, 2 g propacetamoliv were administered. Postoperative analgesia was provided after hourly assessment of pain (VAS 0–100 mm), with 10 mg nalbuphineiv if VAS ≥ 50 mm, during the eight hours after surgery. Sedation score (awake 0 to unrousable 4) was also recorded. Analgesia satisfaction score (nil 0 to excellent 4) obtained from the patient on discharge.

Results

Sedation scores were similar in both groups except in the first postoperative hour, when it was higher in the Iso group. The VAS at rest (15.4 ± 18.6 vs 29.7 ± 19.8 mm,P = 0.0001) and nalbuphine requirements (0.13 ± 0.35vs 0.70 ± 0.80 doses,P = 0.004) were lower in the Iso group during the first six hours, although emesis was more frequent than in P (60vs 25%; P = 0.03). The incidence of analgesia satisfaction score (≥3) was similar between the two groups (P: 95; Iso: 75%).

Conclusion

These results suggested that isoflurane anaesthesia provides better analgesia than propofol anaesthesia in the first six hours after abdominoplasty.     

Measurement of motor evoked potentials following repetitive magnetic motor cortex stimulation during isoflurane or propofol anaesthesia

Background. Isoflurane and propofol reduce the recordabilityof compound muscle action potentials (CMAP) following singletranscranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex (sTCMS).Repetition of the magnetic stimulus (repetitive transcranialmagnetic stimulation, rTCMS) might allow the inhibition causedby anaesthesia with isoflurane or propofol to be overcome. Methods. We applied rTCMS (four stimuli; inter-stimulus intervalsof 3, 4, 5 ms (333, 250, 200 Hz), output 2.5 Tesla) in 27 patientsand recorded CMAP from the hypothenar and anterior tibial muscle.Anaesthesia was maintained with fentanyl 0.5–1 µgkg^–1 h^–1 and either isoflurane 1.2% (10 patients)or propofol 5 mg kg^–1 h^–1 with nitrous oxide 60%in oxygen (17 patients). Results. No CMAP were detected during isoflurane anaesthesia.During propofol anaesthesia 333 Hz, four-pulse magnetic stimulationevoked CMAP in the hypothenar muscle in 75%, and in the anteriortibial muscle in 65% of the patients. Less response was obtainedwith 250 and 200 Hz stimulation. Conclusions. In most patients, rTCMS can overcome suppressionof CMAP during propofol/nitrous oxide anaesthesia, but not duringisoflurane anaesthesia. A train of four magnetic stimuli ata frequency of 333 Hz is most effective in evoking potentialsfrom the upper and lower limb muscles. The authors concludethat rTCMS can be used for evaluation of the descending motorpathways during anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 487–92     

Comparison of propofol/alfentanil anaesthesia with isoflurane/N2O/fentanyl anaesthesia for renal transplantation

Total intavenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with propofol and alfentanil was compared with balanced anaesthesia (BA) in 30 uraemic patients undergoing renal transplantation. TIVA (n=15) was induced with propofol and alfentanil and maintained with propofol and alfentanil infusions, which were started immediately after induction. Thereafter the infusion rates were adjusted as needed. Ventilation was with oxygen in air. BA (n= 15) was induced with thiopentone and fentanyl and maintained with isoflurane/N20/fentanyl. Vecuronium was used for muscle relaxation in both groups. Mean infusion rates for propofol and alfentanil were 10 1.8 mg kg^-1 h^-1 and 70 9 μg kg^-1 h^-1, respectively. To control hypertension during TIVA, larger amounts of propofol and alfentanil were needed and slower recovery was observed than in previous studies in ASA 1–2 patients. Also, significantly more vecuronium was needed during TIVA than during BA ( P < 0.05). The recovery parameters were similar in both groups, except for the occurrence of nausea, which was less after TIVA. In conclusion, TIVA had no clinical advantages over BA.     

Effect of tramadol on Bispectral Index during intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of tramadol on the Bispectral Index (BIS) during total intravenous propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia. Forty-four adult ASA Physical status I-II patients, scheduled for elective general surgical procedures were included in a prospective observational randomized study. Doses for anaesthetics and opioids were adjusted to keep the BIS value at 50 +/- 5. After 20 minutes of stable anaesthesia, the subjects were randomly allocated to receive intravenous saline (control group) or tramadol 1.5 mg/kg (tramadol group). BIS values, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate were recorded every five minutes for 20 minutes. Mean BIS values after tramadol administration were not significantly different from those following saline, throughout the observation period (P > 0.05). There were no patients in whom BIS values were more than 60 or who presented explicit recall of events under anaesthesia. There were no significant changes in mean arterial pressure, SpO2, or heart rate (P > 0.05). The results indicate that the administration of tramadol during stable total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol-remifentanil does not affect BIS values. The clinical relevance is that tramadol can be safely administered pre- and intraoperatively as pre-emptive or preventive analgesia without modification of the depth of anaesthesia.